Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

BEST ARTILLERY IN THE WORLD.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: BEST ARTILLERY IN THE WORLD.
    Posted: 20-May-2006 at 21:21


Hi, guys, I contunue the "best whatever" type of topics, we allready have best tank and warship, here is another one:

What is the best artillery to your opinion, best as the most powerful and longest range.

types of artillery I am thinking about are self propelled and rocket artillery, since not much countries are using towed nowadays (if ther eare other types of artillery, tell me please)

My picks would be Smerch MLRS for rocekt, here is why:

Longer range than any other artillery system on this planet, and a very big calibre, 300 mm, 12 tubes, shoots all rockets in 38 seconds, has a homing spy vehicle that hangs above the battlefield for 30 minutes, launched from one of the tubes. One salvo covers 670x670 meters of area, leaving nothing alive there.

The range is by the way 90 km with new rocekts and 70 km with usual.

Can shatter anti-tank mines over a large area.

can use fuel air explosives, in short, here is the link that says all it can use:

http://www.splav.org/en/arms/smerch/index.asp

Smerch is considered by many experts to be a single best rocket artillery on the planet, "Smerch" means hurricane in russian.

note: all those who want to say that US M270 has longer range, because it can launch an Army TACMS, all those people, note that ATACMS is not considered artillery, but short range ballistic missile, if those people want to classify ATACMS as artillery, let us for same reasons classify Iskander as artiller (400 km range).

For self-propelled conventional artillery, I would pick Pion, largest, most powerful, longest range.

Pion has 203.2 mm gun, uses 110 kg shells, range is 47 km for shells with engine, 37 km for just usual shells.

here is the link:

http://www.enemyforces.com/artillery/pion.htm
    
    

Edited by Russian - 20-May-2006 at 22:19
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-May-2006 at 21:47
come on guys, let us discuss some artillery
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-May-2006 at 06:22
well i'd prefer instead of "best" which is quite absolutist sounding.

Relative strengths and weakness of todays'...... would be more accurate.
While artillery is a broad group, I would split it into
  • MRL's of varoius sizes,
  • self propelled wheeled and tracked artillery
  • light and heavier calibre towed artillery .

And then you have Mortars

in the tank thread i took a position that one size doesnt fit all. I would imagine each category has its own advantages and practicalites, let alone systems.

Edited by Leonidas - 23-May-2006 at 06:23
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-May-2006 at 09:39

Originally posted by Leonidas


well i'd prefer instead of "best" which is quite absolutist sounding. Relative strengths and weakness of todays'...... would be more accurate.While artillery is a broad group, I would split it into
  • MRL's of varoius sizes,
  • self propelled wheeled and tracked artillery
  • light and heavier calibre towed artillery .
And then you have Mortarsin the tank thread i took a position that one size doesnt fit all. I would imagine each category has its own advantages and practicalites, let alone systems.


well, I would say that MLRS is the most powerful by far, longer range, more powerfu lexplosives, more area taken out.

but anyway, tell me what you think the best in each of the categories you provided.
    
Back to Top
Cezar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Nov-2005
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1211
  Quote Cezar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-May-2006 at 12:23
I'm not very well informed about modern days artillery though from what I've read the Russians are on top at all categories.
What about close support artillery, aren't there any more of those?
I know you can use MLRS to hit the enemy at near strategic range but infantry still need close support artillery. And that Smerch doesn't seem to be the best item I need to do that.
And what about infantry artillery, recoiless guns or mortars. Aren't they useful anymore. I remember that in the Falklands war the British forces still used the 105 mm alpine gun.
Do I need a Smerch for close support or a Katiusha 82 will do the job as well and at a far lower price.
In close support, artillery is mostly for supression  of the enemy so that infantry can engage in close combat. You don't always want everything in front of you blasted into oblivion.
So I'll say that artillery, by being a support to infantry, or tanks (though tanks themselves cannot accomplish a conquest, infantry is also required to consolidate the gains of a breaktrough of the armor) is necessarelyy related to the theater, therefore the best artillery is the one that can most efficiently ensure the achievement of the fighting in my favor. Whether I use a 800 mm howitzer or a 25 mm anti-tank gun.
I don't see the use of a Smerch in an alpine troops engagement or jungle warfare.
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-May-2006 at 13:43


Originally posted by Cezar

I'm not very well informed about modern days artillery though from what I've read the Russians are on top at all categories.
What about close support artillery, aren't there any more of those?

I know you can use MLRS to hit the enemy at near strategic range but infantry still need close support artillery. And that Smerch doesn't seem to be the best item I need to do that.

And what about infantry artillery, recoiless guns or mortars. Aren't they useful anymore. I remember that in the Falklands war the British forces still used the 105 mm alpine gun.

Do I need a Smerch for close support or a Katiusha 82 will do the job as well and at a far lower price.

In close support, artillery is mostly for supression of the enemy so that infantry can engage in close combat. You don't always want everything in front of you blasted into oblivion.

So I'll say that artillery,by beinga support to infantry, or tanks (though tanks themselves cannot accomplish a conquest, infantry is also required to consolidate the gains of a breaktrough of the armor) is necessarelyy related to the theater, therefore the best artillery is the one that can most efficiently ensure the achievement of the fighting in my favor. Whether I use a 800 mm howitzer or a 25 mm anti-tank gun.

I don't see the use of a Smerch in analpine troopsengagement or jungle warfare.


Smerch can and soon will be used in mountains, that's why India bought it recently from Russia.

you will not be able to efficiently use 800 mm gun, you will not be able to properly move it, then the projectile is so big that it can't be shot that far (I again mean long range engagements)

You are right though, Smerch has ridiculous range and the smallest range you can shoot it is 20 km, but ok, for close ranges Russia has this:

Buratino TOS-1:

http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=TOS-1&btnG=Search&sa=N&tab=wi

30!!! tubes, smallest range is 400 meters, longest - 3,5 km, burns everything alive to ashes, uses fuel air explosives, does a full salvo in 7,5 seconds. Again, no equivalents in other armies.

I don't know much about mortars, I think it is outdated, while you have this thing, which will burn digged enemy, enemy mines and everything else that you need burned, it can be also used as a weapon for cleaing up after chemical weapons so that troops can go there.

And here, this thing will destroy Abrams from above:

http://www.splav.org/ru/arms/smerch/m55k1.asp

it is in russian, I will translate if you are interested, it is self-guiding anti tank projectiles, 5 in one rocket.
    

Edited by Russian - 23-May-2006 at 13:57
Back to Top
Cezar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Nov-2005
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1211
  Quote Cezar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-May-2006 at 14:05
Originally posted by Russian


Originally posted by Cezar

I'm not very well informed about modern days artillery though from what I've read the Russians are on top at all categories.
What about close support artillery, aren't there any more of those?

I know you can use MLRS to hit the enemy at near strategic range but infantry still need close support artillery. And that Smerch doesn't seem to be the best item I need to do that.

And what about infantry artillery, recoiless guns or mortars. Aren't they useful anymore. I remember that in the Falklands war the British forces still used the 105 mm alpine gun.

Do I need a Smerch for close support or a Katiusha 82 will do the job as well and at a far lower price.

In close support, artillery is mostly for supression  of the enemy so that infantry can engage in close combat. You don't always want everything in front of you blasted into oblivion.

So I'll say that artillery, by being a support to infantry, or tanks (though tanks themselves cannot accomplish a conquest, infantry is also required to consolidate the gains of a breaktrough of the armor) is necessarelyy related to the theater, therefore the best artillery is the one that can most efficiently ensure the achievement of the fighting in my favor. Whether I use a 800 mm howitzer or a 25 mm anti-tank gun.

I don't see the use of a Smerch in an alpine troops engagement or jungle warfare.


Smerch can and soon will be used in mountains, that's why India bought it recently from Russia.

you will not be able to efficiently use 800 mm gun, you will not be able to properly move it, then the projectile is so big that it can't be shot that far (I again mean long range engagements)

You are right though, Smerch has ridiculous range and the smallest range you can shoot it is 20 km, but ok, for close ranges Russia has this:

Buratino TOS-1:

http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=TOS-1&btnG=Search&sa=N&tab=wi

30!!! tubes, smallest range is 400 meters, longest - 3,5 km, burns everything to ashes, uses fuel air explosives, does a full salvo in 7,5 seconds.

I don't know much about mortars, I think it is outdated, while you have this thing, which will burn digged enemy, enemy mines and everything else that you need burned, it can be also used as a weapon for cleaing up after chemical weapons so that troops can go there.
 
Gee, man! I said I don't want everything in front of me blasted into oblivion! Just need some suppression so we can go in and get them! I'm not trying to create a hecatomb! Just pour some shells on their strongholds and let us do our job. We need some of them alive and to minimize collateral damage.
 
Here's a stupid 800 mm: the "Dora". Useless but good looking.
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-May-2006 at 17:03

Originally posted by Cezar

Originally posted by Russian

Originally posted by Cezar

I'm not very well informed about modern days artillery though from what I've read the Russians are on top at all categories.
What about close support artillery, aren't there any more of those?

I know you can use MLRS to hit the enemy at near strategic range but infantry still need close support artillery. And that Smerch doesn't seem to be the best item I need to do that.

And what about infantry artillery, recoiless guns or mortars. Aren't they useful anymore. I remember that in the Falklands war the British forces still used the 105 mm alpine gun.

Do I need a Smerch for close support or a Katiusha 82 will do the job as well and at a far lower price.

In close support, artillery is mostly for supression of the enemy so that infantry can engage in close combat. You don't always want everything in front of you blasted into oblivion.

So I'll say that artillery,by beinga support to infantry, or tanks (though tanks themselves cannot accomplish a conquest, infantry is also required to consolidate the gains of a breaktrough of the armor) is necessarelyy related to the theater, therefore the best artillery is the one that can most efficiently ensure the achievement of the fighting in my favor. Whether I use a 800 mm howitzer or a 25 mm anti-tank gun.

I don't see the use of a Smerch in analpine troopsengagement or jungle warfare.
Smerch can and soon will be used in mountains, that's why India bought it recently from Russia. you will not be able to efficiently use 800 mm gun, you will not be able to properly move it, then the projectile is so big that it can't be shot that far (I again mean long range engagements) You are right though, Smerch has ridiculous range and the smallest range you can shoot it is 20 km, but ok, for close ranges Russia has this: Buratino TOS-1: http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en&q=TOS-1&btnG=Search&sa=N&tab=wi 30!!! tubes, smallest range is 400 meters, longest - 3,5 km, burns everything to ashes, uses fuel air explosives, does a full salvo in 7,5 seconds. I don't know much about mortars, I think it is outdated, while you have this thing, which will burn digged enemy, enemy mines and everything else that you need burned, it can be also used as a weapon for cleaing up after chemical weapons so that troops can go there.


Gee, man! I said I don't want everything in front of me blasted into oblivion! Just need some suppression so we can go in and get them! I'm not trying to create a hecatomb! Just pour some shells on their strongholds and let us do our job. We need some of them alive and to minimize collateral damage.


Here's a stupid 800 mm: the "Dora". Useless but good looking.



lol, ok, ok, by the way, The big gun is not the biggest calibre, and one single Smerch unit can deliver more explosives than one shell of this gun, and to much longer range, these huge guns of Germany were a waste of money and resources.

Well, something small, I dunno, nowadays it htey see a stronghold I would guess they would launch something like this except a mortar:

RPO "Shmel'":

http://www.janes.com/defence/land_forces/news/jidr/jidr010104_3_n.shtml

it is also fuel air explosives, clears up a small house in one shoot, there are rumors it has been used in Beslan school siege, but rumors are false (I think), because if it would be used, there would be not much left from school by now. With this you can shoot at bunker, preferably in to the window, everybody in rooms close to it will die, and you can go in, take the position.
Back to Top
aghart View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 05-Sep-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 232
  Quote aghart Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-May-2006 at 17:41
Originally posted by Cezar

I remember that in the Falklands war the British forces still used the 105 mm alpine gun.
 
 
The 105mm light gun used by the British in the Falklands (and still in service) is not the old Alpine gun but a much better and more modern artillery piece. It has been described as the best light weapon of it's type in the world although I expect Russian will now chip in with "the russians have a bigger and better gun than that"LOL
 


Edited by aghart - 26-May-2006 at 17:45
Former Tank Commander (Chieftain)& remember, Change is inevitable!!! except from vending machines
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2006 at 11:26

Originally posted by aghart

Originally posted by Cezar

I remember that in the Falklands war the British forces still used the 105 mm alpine gun.


The 105mm light gun used by the British in the Falklands (and still in service)is not the old Alpine gun but a much better and more modern artillery piece. It has been described as the best light weapon of it's type in the world although I expect Russian will now chip in with "the russians have a bigger and better gun than that"



Dude, rissians got friggin 300 mm 12 tube launcher, what is this , lol, no, I am just kidding, I am not interested in this kind of stuff, but can you tell me where this type of artillery is used, for what purposes?
    
Back to Top
aghart View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 05-Sep-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 232
  Quote aghart Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2006 at 18:29
The Falklands is a classic example of the best use of light artillery.  It can be easily transported by helipcopter, towed by just about any type of vehicle, even pushed and pulled by it's crew to get it into position.
 
Heavy towed or SP guns would have been useless in that situation, they would have sunk in the sodden ground conditions, Russian,  all the large and powerful Russian artillery would have been worse than useless in that conflict. The only time the Soviet forces went into action outside of their own territory was in Afghanistan where they were battered and defeated by a bunch of peasants, maybe if they had had the 105mm light gun ???
Former Tank Commander (Chieftain)& remember, Change is inevitable!!! except from vending machines
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2006 at 19:32

Originally posted by aghart

The Falklands is a classic example of the best use of light artillery. It can be easily transported by helipcopter, towed by just about any type of vehicle, even pushed and pulled by it's crew to get it into position.

Heavy towed or SP guns would have been useless in that situation, they would have sunk in the sodden ground conditions, Russian, all the large and powerful Russian artillery would have been worse than useless in that conflict. The only time the Soviet forces went into action outside of their own territory was in Afghanistan where they were battered and defeated by a bunch of peasants, maybe if they had had the 105mm light gun ???


no, no, no,they were not battered or anything, Afghanistans were battered, if Soviet Union wanted, it would leave NONE alive in Afghanistan, my friend, it would kill whole population, for the same reason, I can say that US is also battered in Iraq it is different kind of war, US was also battered in Vietnam, however, we understand that US had enough land army to erase Iraq or Vietnam from the face of this planet, same true for Afghanistan.
    

Ok, now about mobility, Russian Smerch is very mobile, it is a truck, it is made for russian stupid terrain. I don't think towed artillery is used nowadays a lot, what for?

by asking what is it used as, I mean what is it's purpose, to attack tanks or something else, maybe bunkers? or smaller houses?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-May-2006 at 12:19
Russians werent battered they had it under control. American media tells us how these peasents (with American help) destroyed the evil reds. When infact they didnt, they pulled out not because they were losing but because of politics.

Edited by machine - 28-May-2006 at 12:20
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-May-2006 at 14:44

Originally posted by machine

Russians werent battered theyhad it under control. American media tells us how these peasents (with American help) destroyed the evil reds. When infact they didnt, they pulled out not because they were losing but because of politics.

    

Thank you, Machine.

Yes, it is a common misconception that big countries "GET STUCK" in small countries.

If big countries (Russia, USA) want, the ywill rip the country apart, kill all it' scitizens, easily, but the trick is that they don't go there for that, they go there for other reasons.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2006 at 10:26
Read "Bear Trap" by Brig Yousaf PA. Its about the intelligence operations inside Afghanistan.
BTR-60, tended to blow up, when barely nicked.
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2006 at 11:17

Originally posted by Sparten

Read "Bear Trap" by Brig Yousaf PA. Its about the intelligence operations inside Afghanistan.
BTR-60, tended to blow up, when barely nicked.



well, same is true about US armored personell carriers and sometimes tanks.

but hey, we went away from topic
     
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2006 at 14:48
Soviet equipment in Afghan was mostly inferior. As were most of the troops, most were Cat 3 reservists IIRC.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2006 at 23:01
They were fighting an inferior enemy.
Back to Top
Russian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-May-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 188
  Quote Russian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2006 at 00:26

Originally posted by Sparten

Soviet equipment in Afghan was mostly inferior. As were most of the troops, most were Cat 3 reservists IIRC.

    

that's not true, for artillery soviets used this:

http://images.google.ca/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&q=Buratino+TOS-1&btnG=Search

which is in no way inferior, most contries do not even have equivalent to this.

there was some new studd in Afghanistan, it is just a kind of war that screws big armies up, not with big losses, but with smaller possibility to use your big numbers rather than in the field.
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-May-2006 at 06:48
self propelled track favourite of mine is the PZH 2000 (Greece has 24)


wheeled is the G6 (but some of these newer lighter types like the ceasar seem quite handy for rapid action forces)




for heavy towed, i havent updated what i know. Ive in the past been partial to makers like denel (G5-2000 is the lastest) and Patria,  actaully anything european.

105mm light towed, as already stated is very handy. yes it can be outranged, but its light and more appropiate for certain terrain/sitauations than a whopping PHZ. The british one is the benchmark system, its also made and used in Australia around 60 or so.




Other weapons that should be look at, The Patria double barreled 120mm mortar system, turret has been placed on the CV90 and small partol boats.






Edited by Leonidas - 18-Aug-2007 at 00:43
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.110 seconds.